One thing I have noticed is that Calvinists seem to ignore the OT and it's shadows of Christ.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Truth or Calvinism - That should do it.
- Thread starter Benefactor
- Start date
- Status
One thing I have noticed is that Calvinists seem to ignore the OT and it's shadows of Christ.
It's actually the confession for people besides Presbyterians. I could quote very similar statements from the London Baptist Confession, the New Hampshire Confession (which is Baptist as well). On these matters, they are very similar.
That's not in the text is it? Can you show it in the text. It says, "As the serpent was lifted up so must the Son of man be lifted up." It says nothing about people looking to the serpent or looking to the Son of man.
What are you talking about? I didn't make any snide remarks that I know of.
There doesn't seem to be any question in 212 to answer. However ...
Man is far different than an animal. Biblically speaking, man has the image of God, marred by the fall but not destroyed. He is infinitely higher than animals. This just seems a misunderstanding on your part.
Then you haven't been looking. I suspect that to be the case, because I am not sure how anyone could be misguided as to what people believe when it is so clearly stated unless they aren't looking. Some of the stuff that is said here can only stem from people who aren't reading what is actually being said.
You are just quoting others who agree with you. It's not scripture. You can't quote other Calvinists to prove Calvinism is correct.
Then show me from the OT where anybody was regenerated before they believed God. Show me where they were not able to believe God because they were so depraved.
Selective reading for sure! 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
If you are familiar with the story as the reader who was targeted, you didn't need the actual words "looking up to the serpent"...it was a given!
Telling me to "study my Bible" is a snide remark whether you will ever admit to or not (guessing not)
Actaully it is in the text, the very next passage identifies the very purpose of being 'lifted up'.
The passage about the serpent being lifted up is the picture, illistration and shadow of Christ being lifted up. Being under the judgment of God, which can be simplified as certain death and without hope was imposed upon them for their sin. God made a way of hope for them by His grace in the form of a serpent upon the top of the pole. That being lifted up, if they would look upon it they would be 'saved' from certain death, but they had to do so 'by faith'. It was for this reason, faith or lack thereof, that many died because they would not look upon the serpent which was lifted up. This illistration God had recorded was to be the very illistration of salvation that Jesus would use to explain salvation to Nick.
Yes, it was about being 'lifted up' but there is so much more to the text that elaborates on the subject at hand and does not just cut off there. but goes on to state:
The illistration of being lifted up that people will not perish is derived from the very account of Moses, the Children of Israel, and serpent on the pole who was lifted up so that they might not perish either.
Thus Jesus discussion here centers on the purpose and not simply stating the act. The aspects of the OT story mirror what is to come with Christ Jesus, from life and death, grace and mercy, faith and repentance, judgment and salvation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Amy, if I remember correctly, Pastor Larry is one of those Cals who does not hold to regeneration preceding faith.
No, if your doctrine is correct it cannot be any other way. You say God hardens a man's heart. And I agree there is scripture that says this.
Exo 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
But we know that this was a sin, because it is identified as such in Exo 9:34
Exo 9:34 And when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants.
35 And the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, neither would he let the children of Israel go; as the LORD had spoken by Moses.
There you go, God said he would harden Pharoah's heart in Exo 7:3
And in Exo 9:34 it says Pharoah sinned yet more, and in vs. 35 says his heart was hardened as the Lord had spoken by Moses.
So, if you insist God did indeed mean that he would harden Pharoah's heart in Exo 7:3, then God is responsible for Pharoah's sin.
So, don't accuse me of blasphemy, I am just showing scripture.
But we know from James that God does not tempt any man to sin.
James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
So, do you still insist God hardened Pharoah's heart? Or will you agree that it was Pharoah who hardened his own heart as shown in Exo 9:34?
It is not me that is guilty of blasphemy. Be careful it is not you.
So, did God cause Pharoah to sin by hardening his heart or not??
Please answer that last question.
Last edited by a moderator:
==John 12:32 is not talking about the same type of drawing as John 6:44. John 6:44 is a saving drawing. We know this because in John 6:44 those who are drawn are raised. Here in John 12:32, Jesus has been sought out by some Greeks (vss 20-26). He takes that event to prophecy about His coming death (vss 27-33). When Jesus was lifted up on the cross, He opened the door of salvation to all men. Greeks, Jews, Romans, it did not matter. Salvation is open to everyone who would repent and believe.
==Calvinism accepts the idea of a general grace. The offer of salvation is open to all men, but it is only those God has given to the Son (the elect) who will respond. The issue is not who the offer is given to, it is given to all, the issue is who will respond.
==The doctrine of Irresistable Grace stands on Jesus' words in John 6:37, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me...".
==The anti-election posts I have responded to have been based more on people's opinions than Scripture. Sadly, I think I have responded to very few Bible based arguments. However I have tried to base everything I have said in this thread (last night and this morning) on the Word of God. Having said that, I hold no ill will towards those who disagree with me. Nor would I say anything bad about them or divide from them. The Bible clearly teaches election. As Christians, we may have a different understanding of what that election means, but we should be very careful never to divide or cause unnecessary arguments over this issue. I have made this point several times in this thread.
==People cannot come to Christ, in a saving manner, on their own terms. That is why so many will be cast away from His presence (Matt 7:21-23). Jesus made that very clear in John 6:44. People can be religious, even in a Christian sense, and still be lost. It is a sobering fact that in Matthew 7:21-23 Jesus said that "many" will fall into that category.
==I find it interesting that Total Depravity is one point that Calvinists and most Arminians can/do agree on. It is almost impossible to understand how someone can read what the Scriptures say about man's sinful state and still deny Total Depravity. Passages like Romans 1, 3, Eph 2:1-3, and John 8, make Total Depravity a foregone conclusion in my mind.
"In this state, the Free Will of man toward the True Good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost: And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they are they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace: For Christ has said, Without Me ye can do nothing" -James Arminius (On The Free Will of Man and its Powers).
==And they will fail on their own terms (Jn 6:44, Matt 7:21-23). According to Scripture, no natural man seeks after God (Rom 3:9-12). Men do get religious, even building their religion around Jesus, but that is not coming to Christ in saving faith.
==Man's conscience is a slave to sin (Rom 6:20-21).
I wasn't. I was quoting Calvinists to prove what Calvinists believe. Someone made a post that was in error about Calvinist belief, and I was pointing out that said person did not know what they were talking about.
As for Scriptural proof, the confessions are well documented with Scripture. Even if you don't agree, it would be worth your time to read them. In fact, it would be far better than reading what is posted here most of the time.
Why? And why from the OT? Is the NT not Scripture too? Did the nature of man change in the intertestamental times? Of course not.
Having said that, I don't think people were regenerated before they believed God. But the theological case for it is very good.
OK, I we are very close here believe it or not. I do not believe in Irresistable Grace, but I do believe that all that come to Jesus are given to him by his Father. And I hope I can explain.
I believe that God gets 100% all the honor and glory for salvation. You see, if God did not give us the scriptures, we would not have knowledge of sin. We would not have knowledge of Jesus Christ that he died for our sins. We would not know that God is calling us and inviting us to receive his Son Jesus Christ as saviour.
I do not believe responding to God's call and invitation and believeing on Christ is a work.
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Romans 5:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Without the scriptures that God gave us, we would be in the dark. We would not know of Jesus and therefore could not place our trust in him. So God gets all the credit.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
I think it was Amy that compared our lost condition to falling down a deep well. And I think that is a pretty good picture of the state we were in. If God lowers a rope to us and pulls us out, do we deserve any credit? A Calvinist is so determined to keep man out of the picture because of fear that it steals from the sovereignty of God. It does not. Because we hold on the the rescue rope that God sends down to us (Jesus) does not mean we saved ourselves. If I am lost out at sea and a helicopter flies out and finds me, and lowers itself down to me and I crawl in, did I save myself? Of course not.
The trouble with Calvinism is that you believe that a man is not allowed to take hold of the rescue rope sent down to him. How will he get out? And Romans 10:16 shows that a man can disobey the gospel. So I do not believe in Irresistable Grace.
Jesus tells us to come to him. So is it a sin to come to him? Jesus tells us to ask for the living waters from him (Holy Spirit). So is it a sin to ask Jesus for the Holy Spirit? The scriptures say if we call on Jesus we will be saved. So is it a sin to call on Jesus?
You put restrictions on a man that Jesus himself does not put on a man. If Jesus offers me eternal life and I accept it, how does that steal from God? It honors God. You know, I could hold out my hand and offer you a gift and you could refuse to accept it and walk away. Many men have offered engagement rings to girls and the girls refused it. A gift does not become yours until you accept it.
And Romans 10:14 asks how a man can believe on Jesus if they have never heard of him. So God gets all the honor, glory and credit. Without God's word we would be in the dark and never know to call on Jesus.
But to call on Jesus as the scriptures tell us to do is not a sin. God will never tell you to do something, and then condemn you for doing that very thing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, eternal life is given to those who believe in the Son, not the snake. If you read the OT story, you see that no one has eternal life by looking at the serpent.
As the author of the words, I can assure you it was not a snide remark. Remember, the author is the source of meaning, not the reader. You misread it. It was an encouragement to study the Bible. Still is.
Yes, the purpose of Jesus being lifted up, not the snake.
Yes, it is a picture of Christ being lifted up, not a picture of being given eternal life.
Yes, physical death and life, not eternal death and life. Can you not see that distinction?
But don't you acknowledge that the text doesn't say that? It doesn't say anything about the people not perishing by looking at the snake, right?
You have already shown that you don't even know what my doctrine is.
So we agree. What's the problem?
He also said it in Exod 4:21 (before Pharaoh ever does anything, BTW).
I disagree. The Scriptures say that God did harden Pharaoh's heart and that God is not responsible for sin. Why don't you accept both as statements of truth from God? You have already agreed that God hardened Pharaoh's heart and that God is not responsible for sin. So you agree with me. But for some reason you seem to want to fight about it.
What was blasphemous was the charge that God causes man to sin. I didn't accuse you of blasphemy because you didn't say it. You were trying to extend an argument (and you failed). But it is blasphemous to say that God causes sin.
Of course. You agreed with me. Have you forgotten already? Your very first line of this post was, "You say God hardens a man's heart. And I agree there is scripture that says this" and you cited Exod 7:3. I am not sure why you didn't cite Exod 4:21, but it says the same thing.
Yes, I agree.
I didn't accuse you of that. Again, I was referring to a statement that you don't affirm, and neither do I. I think part of your problem is that you don't read with great comprehension. You thought I was accusing you of blasphemy when I clearly was not. I was speaking of a statement that you don't even believe. So how could you be blasphemous when you don't believe what was blasphemous to begin with? You couldn't.
Part of the whole problem is shown by this. You (and others) read for what you want to see, not what is actually there.
It's not.
No, God hardened Pharaoh's heart, but Pharaoh's sin was of his own free will.
I had answered it several times already I think.
Now, with respect to Exod 4:21, do you agree that God promised to harden Pharaoh's heart before Pharaoh did anything at all?
Well, at least you admit a man has free will, most Calvinists do not.
God did say he would harden Pharoah's heart, but I think you misunderstand what this means.
It does not mean that God caused Pharoah to harden his heart. It means God caused Pharoah's obstinance to show forth. To become apparent. God knew from the beginning Pharoah would not let the children of Israel go.
Exo 3:19 And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand.
Now, this is important, God said this before he ever said he would harden Pharoah's heart. Look it up for yourself in a concordance.
God knew that when he sent Moses before Pharoah that Pharoah would get angry, that he would be proud. And with each plague Pharoah would become more and more obstinate.
This is what God meant. He did not put the sin of rebellion in Pharoah's heart, but he brought it out in the open. He made it visible to all the world.
- Status